Showing posts with label hate speech. Show all posts
Showing posts with label hate speech. Show all posts

Tuesday, June 7, 2011

Anglican Pastor Sizer Hobnobs With Pro Hamas Groups

If you care about Israel, you'll become familiar with the name Stephen Sizer.  Sizer, the Anglican pastor of Christ Church in Surrey, UK, is well known in an evangelical circles. Sizer is also well known in pro-Hamas and antisemitic circles as I will show the reader.
Vicar Stephen Sizer
Stephen has accumulated an impressive list of Christian credentials during his twenty eight years of ordained ministry.  In fact, according to his bio Sizer is a Trustee of the Biblica Ministries Trust, who sponsored and publish the New International Version (NIV), the most widely used English Bible translation.

But as I started to say, there is another side to Sizer as described on his website:
He is a Patron of the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions (ICAHD-UK), a Trustee of Friends of Sabeel UK, a founding member of the Institute for the Study of Christian Zionism (ISCZ), a member of the Advisory Council of Evangelicals for Middle East Understanding (EMEU)
He is also a consultant and contributor to the [anti-Israel and pro-Palestianian-author's remarks] film With God on our Side and the Bible study guide that accompanies the film. . . . He is a contributor to Bridges of Faith, the international Evangelical-Muslim Dialogue Group.
The problem with Sizer's credentials is that once one studies all the groups he associates with, the clearer it becomes that Sizer's major stance is anti-Christian Zionism. In fact, the Vicar has no problems with associating with pro-Hamas groups like Viva Palestina Malaysia and with antisemitic speakers such as Mahathir Mohamad, Azzam Tamimi, and an apologist for anti-Semites Lauren Booth.

Sizer's affiliations are as disturbing as the anti-Israel remarks he makes himself.  But to understand the crowd this so-called evangelical hangs out with, let me pull today's blog from a post contributed by  Joseph W on the blog Harry's Place:

Anglican Vicar hosted by Far Right Malaysian outfit

by Joseph W
In January, this blog reported on the Far Right activities of the anti-Israel outfit Viva Palestina Malaysia.
Stephen Sizer is being hosted by VPM this week – more on him later.
Viva Palestina Malaysia is proudly pro-Hamas. Here is one of VPM’s activists, Azra Banu, meeting the leader of Hamas:
VPM promoted the idea that Jews should all relocate to Siberia, taking their ideas from David Duke’s website:
VPM has chosen to host a range of speakers with extreme views on Israel, including the raging anti-Semite Mahathir MohamadAzzam Tamimi, and the apologist for anti-Semites Lauren Booth.
Mahathir has previously stated:
“the Jews for example are not merely hook-nosed, but understand money instinctively.”
“Jewish stinginess and financial wizardry gained them commercial control of Europe and provoked anti-Semitism which waxed and waned in Europe throughout the ages.”
“We do not want to say that this is a plot by the Jews, but in reality it is a Jew who triggered the currency plunge, and coincidentally Soros is a Jew”
“Of late because of their power and their apparent success [the Jews] have become arrogant. And arrogant people, like angry people will make mistakes, will forget to think.”
When Booth visited VPM, she defended Mahathir from charges of anti-Semitism:
If you speak to Dr. Mahathir, it is clear he has neither the personality nor the inclination to be an anti-Semite. He is a thoughtful, pious and philosophical man.
I want to tell the people of Malaysia not to be scared of being labeled anti-Semitic when criticising the unjust, disgraceful behaviour of the Israel regime.
The label ‘anti-Semite’ is applied deliberately to quash debate on the Israeli government and its army and we must not be afraid to speak out (on it).
VPM is the Malaysian chapter of Viva Palestina, which is overtly a pro-Hamas outfit. The team leader of the Malaysian contingent of one of the Viva Palestina convoys is the Nazi apologist Matthias Chang. 
Here are some quotes from Chang, addressing Iran’s Holocaust-questioning conference in 2006:
In fact, in the early 1930s, it was the Zionists that declared war on Germany.
[...]
There is an arguable legal case for the proposition that Germany, faced with a Zionist Declaration of War in the early 1930s, had the right to defend itself against the Zionists’ agenda to annihilate Germany and her citizens!
Critics may well counter-argue that the above proposition is ridiculous – how could Zionists, not constituting a nation state declare war on Germany? My reply is simple. If Al Qaeda [and the “Jihadists”] can be accused of declaring war on America and which gave rise to the present Global War on Terror, the World Jewish Congress and allied organisations can likewise be accused for their crimes against Germany!
[...]
Those who continue to promote the political line that the Holocaust is a unique and an exceptional Jewish historical event, when compared to the sufferings of the other victims, such as the Chinese who were slaughtered in excess of 10 million, have to that extent minimised the atrocities committed by both sides in WWII. It is an attempt to white-wash the war crimes of the victors in WWII.
[...]
To accept that the Holocaust was an exceptional Jewish historical event is to deny the genocides, massacres and sufferings inflicted on the rest of mankind throughout history. This cannot be right.
I cannot help but question the motives of those who seek to elevate the sufferings of the Jewish people above those who had suffered as much, if not more from the horrors of the Second World War. And when the sufferings of the Jewish people have turned into an industry we owe a moral duty to the departed to ensure that no one should profit from blood money, more so, when lies are perpetrated to further such profiteering.
If we are gathered here to seek truth and to condemn war crimes, then we must condemn all war crimes, not just those allegedly committed by the defeated in WWII. If we judge Hitler, Mussolini and Tojo as war criminals, then we cannot but find Churchill, Roosevelt and Stalin guilty as well.
[...]
We must set up an International Commission of Jurists to review the findings of the Nuremberg Military Tribunal.
We must set up a War Crimes Tribunal to adjudicate on the crimes of all Allied Powers leaders during WWII.
That Booth and Sizer should collude with this political group closely associated with a Nazi-apologist, speaks volumes. Last Friday, and this coming Tuesday, VPM are hosting the “anti-Zionist” vicar Rev Stephen Sizer.
Depressingly, the lectures are being held in the name of interfaith dialogue, in co-ordination with the International Institute of Advanced Islamic Studies, which is funded by the Malaysian government.
Given that he supports political protests outside synagogues on holy days, Sizer is probably the last person you want at an interfaith conference. 
Yet Sizer enjoys evangelising over the world, spreading the Bad News about Israel to the four corners of the Earth, to all who will listen. He has form. 
When Sizer went to Indonesia and spoke alongside government officials, he shared a platform with Holocaust denier Fred Tobin, reps from Hamas and Hezbollah, and an apocalyptic imam who believes Israel will be destroyed in 2022. 
Sizer has also visited Iran to give a tour speaking about Christian Zionism. He has since claimed that he formed links with the Iranian opposition when he was in the country, although the evidence tells another story. 
Sizer has recently caused concern by suggesting that Colonel Gaddafi and his son are linked to Israel and the USA by Jewish blood, which initially prevented the world from imposing a no-fly-zone over Libya. 
I know the Church of England doesn’t like getting involved in these matters, but really now: this is the Church that suspended a bishop for offending William and Kate. 
Surely the Church should do or say something about a maverick vicar involved in supporting pro-Nazi outfits – all whilst wearing his Anglican clerical collar. 
If you wish to complain to the Church, I strongly recommend you contact the Archbishop of Canterbury. I will.

Share/Bookmark

Tuesday, December 4, 2007

Don Imus is Not the Problem




Eight months after the controversy that made Don Imus a national lightning rod for accusations of being a racist, the radio personality has returned to the air.

Imus, according to news reports, was contrite and spoke of his error as "reprehensible" in using a racist and sexist slur in referring to the Rutgers University women's basketball team as "nappy headed hos." Back in April when he made his thoughtless comments, Imus met with the female athletes for four hours. He vowed after that encounter to "never say anything in my life that will make those young woman . . . feel foolish that they forgave me." Despite his contriteness, Imus' comments led to his quick dismissal after just one week.

Karl Frisch, a spokesman for Media Matters for America, said to the Washington Post of Imus, "Don Imus has an opportunity to show the American people that he has learned from his experience -- that the bigoted insults he once leveled on a regular basis have no place on the public's airwaves." Assuming Imus makes regular ethnic slurs on the airwaves, he cannot be excused.


I do not excuse Imus' irresponsible comments made eight months ago. Philip Nobile, a freelance moralist, noted that "Imus needs to apologize for a lifetime of bigotry." Yes, Imus has an issue. A serious issue.

But he is not the issue.

The real and deeper issue is the consistent usage of these racist comments by African American rap singers.

When the Imus storm broke, Oprah invited to her show the Rutgers Women Basketball team plus several music industry moguls and a "clean" rap star. The take away from the show was a promise made by the music industry crowd to host meetings to discuss the usage of offensive language in rap songs.

On a recent Hannity and Colmes show, Sean Hannity asks some of his guests whether any rap stars were fired in the past eight months because of racially offensive language in their songs. The guests evaded any answer.

So what we do conclude from this white/black interchange of racial comments? Are African American rap singers held to a lower standard of intolerance than whites? Listen to the lyrics of the rap star 50 Cent in his song ,"That Ain't Gangsta" (please excuse the repeated references to the "N" word):

How you gonna take this? like a Man or a bitch?
you gon' get it on nigga or you gon' snitch?
I represent niggas in the hood gettin' rich
man, I stack chips and I unload clips
after 3 Summers in the joint I thought life was hard
some niggas started fightin', some niggas found God
you know me, started sellin' leek in the yard

Offensive enough? He makes Don Imus look like a pussycat. Why is 50 Cent allowed to use the "N" word? Just because he's black? That doesn't matter. It's a racist ugly term whether it comes from the mouth of an African American or a Caucasian. Unfortunately, the term has become commonplace among blacks and used as a greeting. I grew up in Newark, NJ in the sixties. Unfortunately, I speak as an eyewitnesss.

As a Jew I would be highly offended if a fellow Jewish person said hello to me using the "K" word or any other antisemitic term. I have a lot of Italian friends and the only time I have ever heard an ugly word used to describedanother Italian is when they are angry at that person or the other individual did something despicable. I've never heard an Italian refer to another Italian using a racial slur in a commonplace manner.

The problem is not Don Imus. The problem is a lack of respect among African Americans in how they speak to one another and how the rap artists sing to each other.

I could never imagine Martin Luther King referring to his staff using the "N" word. Listen to the speeches of Bill Cosby asking blacks to stop using the "N" word.

The only thing wrong about Imus' comment is that it came out of a white mouth. If he was Black, that would not have been a problem . . . so it appears.

How do I know? Listen to the lyrics of Soulja Body in their recent 2007 song Crank That Soulja Boy:
Soulja Boy Off In This Hoe
Watch Me Crank It
Watch Me Roll
Watch Me Crank Dat Soulja Boy
Then Super Man Dat Hoe
Now Watch Me Do
(Crank Dat Soulja Boy)
Now Watch Me Do
(Crank Dat Soulja Boy)
Now Watch Me Do
(Crank Dat Soulja Boy)
Now Watch Me Do
(Crank Dat Soulja Boy)

Do you see the "H" word? Isn't this word a put down on African American women, calling them "hos"? Why does Soulja Boy get a free pass referring to Black women with a term that got a white man fired from his job? Something is wrong with this picture. . . terribly wrong. I call it "injustice."

Meetings among music industry gangsta rap executives will not change a thing. As bold as WABC was in firing Imus, there needs to be more courageous firings in the music media.

Martin Luther King use to warn of the ideology of gradualism, the idea that eventually and gradually using meetings and speeches, civil rights for Blacks with eventually change. Dr. King rejected that idea and called for immediate action. When I hear African American record executives speak of dealing with racially offensive language in rap songs by having meetings, it's gradualism all over again.

Want to make gradualism go away? Stop buying rap artist's CDs until something changes. I am speaking to white suburban types who purchase this music. I am speaking to the African American community and their need to rise up with the likes of Bill Cosby and say, "Enough is enough. Clean it up. No more "N" words in your music. Stop accusing whites like Don Imus for using racial slurs while you use them yourself." It's an issue of self-respect and the Black community has accomplished quite a lot to be proud of and has produced some incredible leaders and intellects to create a deep sense of pride.

As a white man . . . a Jewish white man . . I say "Stamp out the 'N' word from Rap music." The time is now.
Share/Bookmark